Which Do You Like Best?

[theenormityofitall]

Short stories or full length novels? I guess I should mention novellas as well. I personally like short stories since I find it difficult to read a full length novel with my type of attention span.
Short stories are perfect for me: short so I don't get bored which also keeps me interested (obviously).
Just curious to what others think...

[TJCams]

I am kind of both. A lot depends though on the book/story. I try to avoid longer novels, as it takes me a long time to finish lengthy books. I really enjoyed Night Shift a collection of short stories, as it flowed really well, and the stories (most of them anyways) were enjoyable fast reads. I also really like Strangers by Koontz, which for me at least, is longer. Close to 700 pages. It took a long time to get through it though.

[theenormityofitall]

You're just like me...I can get into Koontz novels more than I can King's; I just like his writing style better. And I too try to avoid lengthy novels except for some of Ayn Rand's and War and Peace; the classics in other words. I like non-horror novels much more than just straight horror novels unless they're really good like the above mentioned Koontz or some of King's, Garton's and Laymon.

[Dan Hocker]

I'm a power reader, so longer books don't really phase me much, accept for the amount of sleep I get while I'm reading them. I think I generally prefer novels, but even more so series where the story goes for multiple books. I think it provides for a more in-depth experience.

[Martin]

It's all about the story for me. If it is a story that grabs me I can easily get through a long novel, Laymon's Traveling Vampire Show and King's The Stand are examples. If the story does not grab me a 200 page novel can take a long time to get through.

[theenormityofitall]

I'm a power reader, so longer books don't really phase me much, accept for the amount of sleep I get while I'm reading them. I think I generally prefer novels, but even more so series where the story goes for multiple books. I think it provides for a more in-depth experience.

That's what I wish I could do too, Dan. Read a series like The Dark Tower; it's hard to believe for people on here that I've never read a word of a DT book even though I have limiteds of 5 of them, but it's true. I guess there's too many things going on over the past several years for me to even try. People that remember me know I have a neck injury involving herniated discs so that's a big problem with the pain, etc. But I really want to start one and finish the series, not just quit after 30 pages which is a bad habit of mine.

[theenormityofitall]

It's all about the story for me. If it is a story that grabs me I can easily get through a long novel, Laymon's Traveling Vampire Show and King's The Stand are examples. If the story does not grab me a 200 page novel can take a long time to get through.

Yep, years ago I could actually read big novels...The Stand and Swan Song (which I thought was better than The Stand) are perfect examples. Carrion Comfort was good too. But as I got older, I just can't do it anymore. At least most of the time.

[saginawhorror]

short stories definitely for me. Although I like a good novel too.

[RJK1981]

I would probably have to say novellas and novels and then short stories. I like short stories, but I prefer stories that are long enough to get to know the characters and such more, as well as get into the world and story that is created by the author. I have mentioned it before, but I am horrible about getting through short story collections. I like the stories, but it is very easy to be distracted by something else in between stories.

[srboone]

I like novels. Something meaty I can sink my teeth into , get involved in and not come up for a while. Though I can't deny the impact of the short story--something quick, that sinks in and leaves before its impact can be diluted with filller. The novella is something in between and I usually think twice before starting one. Most I've read don't merit a novel, but contain more than is necessary for it's impact. It would definitely be my last choice.

[frik51]

I love long novels (when they're good...), but novellas or short stories are fine as well.
At the moment I'm working my way through CD's The Century's Best Horror Fiction - I'm up to the year 1961.
Afther that, finally, McCammon's The Providence Rider.

sk

[theenormityofitall]

It seems most people like the long ones. Novellas are pretty good too like King's Full Dark, No Stars as an example.

I like novels. Something meaty I can sink my teeth into , get involved in and not come up for a while.

That's how I feel about non-fiction. I can get lost in another era where I find it hard to do with a novel; I was born 100 years too late. And as I said before, I like non-horror better than literal horror novels. It doesn't seem to be very difficult to write a blood and guts horror novel than it would be to write something like Tobacco Road which I liked so much. A drama with comedic elements (at least to me that's how I felt about it).

[Lou Sytsma]

I like both because each has its own unique strengths. Shorts stories are like quick shots to the head and/or heart while novels are like sips of your favorite drink and savoring and discovering the various flavors that went into making it.

[Joe315]

I prefer long novels. I love picking up a large book from a favorite author knowing I am going to be in their world for a while. I sometimes feel disappointed finishing a book and realizing I have to wait a year to read the next one.

[Tommy]

Although I enjoy both, my eyesight is pretty bad when it comes to reading and I do read a lot when I can but I read slow and I am more inclined towards short stories these days because I feel they really lend themselves to horror better than any other story form and because I can get one read without my eyes bothering me too much, I still really love novels though, it's all good!